netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/2] Makefile.extrawarn: Add symbol for W=1 warnings for today

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201005194913.GC56634@lunn.ch>
Date:   Mon, 5 Oct 2020 21:49:13 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Rohit Maheshwari <rohitm@...lsio.com>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/2] Makefile.extrawarn: Add symbol for W=1
 warnings for today

> Sorry, to be more specific about my concern; I like the idea of
> exporting the W=* flags, then selectively applying them via
> subdir-ccflags-y.  I don't like the idea of supporting W=1 as defined
> at a precise point in time via multiple date specific symbols.  If
> someone adds something to W=1, then they should need to ensure subdirs
> build warning-free, so I don't think you need to "snapshot" W=1 based
> on what it looked like on 20200930.

Hi Nick

That then contradicts what Masahiro Yamada said to the first version i
posted:

https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg685284.html
> With this patch series applied, where should we add -Wfoo-bar?
> Adding it to W=1 would emit warnings under drivers/net/ since W=1 is
> now the default for the net subsystem.

The idea with the date stamps was to allow new warnings to be added to
W=1 without them immediately causing warnings on normal builds. You
are saying that whoever adds a new warning to W=1 needs to cleanup the
tree which is already W=1 clean? That might have the side effect that
no more warnings are added to W=1 :-(

   Andrew